Close Menu
  • Home
  • Alternative News
    • Politics & Policy
    • Independent Journalism
    • Geopolitics & War
    • Economy & Power
    • Investigative Reports
  • Double Speak
    • Media Bias
    • Fact Check & Misinformation
    • Political Spin
    • Propaganda & Narrative
  • Truth or Scare
    • UFO & Extraterrestrial
    • Myth Busting & Debunking
    • Paranormal & Mysteries
    • Conspiracy Theories
  • Contact Us
  • About Us

Subscribe to Updates

Get the latest creative news from FooBar about art, design and business.

What's Hot

Lawsuits accuse corporate ‘cartel’ of monopolizing Missouri marijuana

May 22, 2026

‘Bitcoin transactions can be monitored’: Ray Dalio explains why central banks won’t touch BTC

May 22, 2026

Video of my Bruno Leoni Institute (Milan) Talk on the Supreme Court Tariff Decision and its Implications

May 22, 2026
Facebook X (Twitter) Instagram
Facebook X (Twitter) Instagram
TheOthernews
Subscribe
  • Home
  • Alternative News
    • Politics & Policy
    • Independent Journalism
    • Geopolitics & War
    • Economy & Power
    • Investigative Reports
  • Double Speak
    • Media Bias
    • Fact Check & Misinformation
    • Political Spin
    • Propaganda & Narrative
  • Truth or Scare
    • UFO & Extraterrestrial
    • Myth Busting & Debunking
    • Paranormal & Mysteries
    • Conspiracy Theories
  • Contact Us
  • About Us
TheOthernews
Home»Politics & Policy»Why does Trump keep bringing up decades-old foreign grievances?
Politics & Policy

Why does Trump keep bringing up decades-old foreign grievances?

nickBy nickMay 21, 2026No Comments4 Mins Read
Facebook Twitter Pinterest LinkedIn Tumblr Email
Share
Facebook Twitter LinkedIn Pinterest Email


The U.S. Department of Justice indicted former Cuban President Raúl Castro on Wednesday for his 1996 order to shoot down two planes from Brothers to the Rescue, a Cuban-American organization involved in dropping anti-communist pamphlets over Havana.

Why reopen a 3-decade-old murder case now? The Trump administration has made no secret of the fact that it wants to overthrow the Cuban government—and is willing to go to war to do so. While President Donald Trump and Secretary of State Marco Rubio issue thinly veiled threats to Cuba, administration officials have been anonymously telling the press that yes, they mean military action.

The indictment was obviously meant to evoke the recent U.S. operation in Venezuela, in which U.S. special operations forces invaded Venezuela to serve a drug-trafficking warrant against dictator Nicolás Maduro. During the buildup to that operation, which involved U.S. forces seizing Venezuelan tankers, Trump and his advisers also claimed that they were going to avenge Venezuela’s 2007 nationalization of American oil companies by recovering stolen property.

And to justify starting the mother of all undeclared wars with Iran, the Trump administration has brought up a litany of old grievances. Trump’s announcement of the war started with the 1980 storming of the U.S. Embassy in Tehran and the 1983 attack on U.S. Marines by a pro-Iran militia in Lebanon, both of which happened before most Americans or Iranians were born.

Sen. Tom Cotton (R–Ark.) unintentionally summed up the administration’s pretzel logic in an interview early in the war: “Iran has posed an imminent risk to the United States for 47 years.” The Islamic Republic was so urgently dangerous that there was no time to ask Congress or the American people for permission to fight it, and also this situation has existed for two generations.

These grievances are not a serious argument about the Cuban, Venezuelan, or Iranian threat. They are a replacement for an argument. Instead of making the case that the costs of war (or whatever euphemism for war the administration is using now) are worth the benefits, the administration wants Americans riled up about injuries to our honor and hungry for revenge.

In fact, bringing up these grievances is a sign that the Trump administration doesn’t see these countries as real, imminent threats. Arguing that the Iran war would not become a “forever war,” former Trump administration official Robert O’Brien called it “the quintessential American punitive expedition,” a campaign of “short, sharp projections of force that punish foreign powers or dictators for their untoward actions.”

O’Brien added that a “key advantage of the punitive expedition strategy is its optionality.…The initiative remains with [the president], so that he determines the pace and tempo of kinetic action, not the enemy.” That’s a fancy way of saying that the president should flex by taking revenge on easy targets who can’t fight back.

Punitive expeditions also help the administration advance its domestic agenda. Vice President J.D. Vance claims that the War Powers Act is “a fundamentally fake and unconstitutional law” that is “not going to change anything about how we conduct foreign policy,” and White House Homeland Security adviser Stephen Miller has similar contempt for Congress’ ability to restrain the president. What better way to flex presidential power than to start and stop wars before anyone has a chance to act?

The bet on knockout blows against weak enemies worked out well in Venezuela. The idea of war with Venezuela was highly unpopular in America before Maduro’s overthrow. But the Venezuelan military barely put up a fight; Maduro’s successor kowtowed to U.S. power; domestic objections to the operation in America melted away; and Congress’ concern for war powers was promptly forgotten.

“We’re a superpower, and under President Trump, we are going to conduct ourselves as a superpower,” Miller gloated after the Venezuela operation. Vance similarly said that “Maduro is the newest person to find out that President Trump means what he says.” 

That wager did not work so well in Iran. The war dragged on for weeks and is now in a bizarre kind of suspended animation, rousing Congress to finally start asserting its war powers. Precisely because “Iran has gone sideways,” an administration official told Politico, the Trump administration may be looking for more decisive action in Cuba.

The idea that a crumbling, poor Cold War relic poses some kind of threat to America is laughable. And an invasion of Cuba is overwhelmingly unpopular with Americans. But that combination is exactly why Cuba would be a tempting place to repeat the Venezuela model, which is why the Trump administration is bringing up ancient feuds now.



Source link

Share. Facebook Twitter Pinterest LinkedIn Tumblr Email
nick
  • Website

Related Posts

Video of my Bruno Leoni Institute (Milan) Talk on the Supreme Court Tariff Decision and its Implications

May 22, 2026

Minnesota law banning prediction markets creates victimless crime

May 21, 2026

Trump's GOP Victories Could Be Headaches in November

May 21, 2026
Leave A Reply Cancel Reply

Demo
Our Picks

Putin Says Western Sanctions are Akin to Declaration of War

January 9, 2020

Investors Jump into Commodities While Keeping Eye on Recession Risk

January 8, 2020

Marquez Explains Lack of Confidence During Qatar GP Race

January 7, 2020

There’s No Bigger Prospect in World Football Than Pedri

January 6, 2020
Stay In Touch
  • Facebook
  • Twitter
  • Pinterest
  • Instagram
  • YouTube
  • Vimeo
Don't Miss

Lawsuits accuse corporate ‘cartel’ of monopolizing Missouri marijuana

Political Spin May 22, 2026

When Missouri legalized recreational marijuana in 2022, it put laws on the books to prevent…

‘Bitcoin transactions can be monitored’: Ray Dalio explains why central banks won’t touch BTC

May 22, 2026

Video of my Bruno Leoni Institute (Milan) Talk on the Supreme Court Tariff Decision and its Implications

May 22, 2026

Trump’s old taxes can’t be audited as part of IRS deal. That’s unprecedented — and hard to reverse

May 21, 2026

Subscribe to Updates

Get the latest creative news from SmartMag about art & design.

Facebook X (Twitter) Instagram Pinterest
© 2026 ThemeSphere. Designed by ThemeSphere.

Type above and press Enter to search. Press Esc to cancel.